Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 633 (MP)

Archana Pandey v. State of M. P.

2019-09-04

VISHNU PRATAP SINGH CHAUHAN

body2019
ORDER 1. This application has been filed by the applicant under section 482 of the CrPC for transferring the case i.e. S.T. No. 31/19 pending before the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Betul for the offence punishable under section 306 of the IPC. 2. Facts giving rise to the petition, in short, are that the applicant is a Government Servant and worked as an accountant in the District Court Khandwa. She has been appointed and posted in District Court Betul later on, promoted to the post of Accountant in the year 2010. Deceased was also working as a Stenographer in the District Court Betul committed suicide on 1st March, 2018 by consuming poison substance. He was brought to the hospital. Doctor declared him dead on arrival and informed to the police. Temporary Marge No. 024/18 was registered at Police Station situated at government hospital and Original Marge No. 15/18 was registered under section 174 of the CrPC at Police Station Kotwali, District Betul. During investigation, the father of the deceased submitted a suicide note in which it was mentioned that the applicant developed relation with the deceased and exploited him and pressurized him to get marry with her despite knowing that he was a married person having a child. The deceased went into the depression and ultimately committed suicide under the pressure of the applicant. Police Station Kotwali registered a Crime No. 271/2018 for the offence punishable under section 306 of the IPC against the applicant. After investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed before the Court of JMFC, Betul. The Court of JMFC committed the case for trial which was registered at S.T. No. 31/19 pending before the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Betul. 3. The applicant filed an application under section 407 of the IPC for transferring the case from Betul to another District on the ground that brother-in-law and nephew of the deceased created influence over the Bar Association and on the police and under that influence, any member of the Bar Association is not ready to prosecute the case of the applicant, then she has been insisted to engage some counsel out side of the District. This fact clearly shows that the applicant cannot defend his case properly, therefore, prays to transfer this case from District Court Betul to another District near to District Betul may be Narsinghpur, Harda and Hoshangabad. 4. This fact clearly shows that the applicant cannot defend his case properly, therefore, prays to transfer this case from District Court Betul to another District near to District Betul may be Narsinghpur, Harda and Hoshangabad. 4. Learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State submits that the case is being tried fairly in the Competent Court and there is no need to transfer the case, therefore, prays to dismiss the application. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the brother-in-law and nephew of the deceased were also posted in the District Court, Betul who are influenced persons and having influenced the Bar Association and Police, there are possibilities of tampering the witnesses. 7. This Court considered that if situation is like this there is possibility of tampering the witnesses under significant influence, this Court under the same circumstances, vide order dated 29.9.2011 passed in MCrC No. 8903/2011 transferred the case. 8. Hon'ble apex Court in the case of Sarasamma alias Saraswathiyamma v. State Represented By Deputy Superintendent of Police and others, 2019(1) MPLJ (Cri.) (S.C.) 311 in 24 has held as under : "24. As justice should not only be done, but also seem to have been done, it would be necessary that the trial should take place in a fair and transparent manner, wherein there should be no element of bias or witness tampering As the appellant has clearly made out a case for transfer, we are inclined to accept the prayer sought by the Appellant in this case. Accordingly, the case being SC No. 1 of 2013 pending before the Additional Sessions Court, Hosur is directed to be transferred to Principal Sessions Court at Salem, Tamil Nadu. Further the trial court is directed to conduct the trial in an expeditious manner and uninfluenced by any observations made herein." 9. On the basis of the proposition laid down by the Hon'ble apex Court in the above case, this Court is inclined to transfer the case from 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Betul to the Sessions Court, Hoshangabad. 10. Accordingly, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. S.T. No. 31/19 pending before 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Betul is hereby transferred from that Court to the Sessions Court Hoshangabad. 10. Accordingly, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. S.T. No. 31/19 pending before 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Betul is hereby transferred from that Court to the Sessions Court Hoshangabad. 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Betul is directed to inform the date of appearance before the Sessions Court Hoshangabad to the parties and send the case immediately so that case may be reached before the date given to the parties. Sessions Court Hoshangabad would dispose of the case as per law.